C# style multi-dimensional indexing?

[woeful rock]

arr[x][y] = 3?

sorry then i don't know c# lol

[sonic wren]

what type is arr in your c# example?

if you want to, say, make an object that acts like a 2d array but actually stores the values in a flat array and computes indices, then you'd need a struct with something like

pub fn get(self: *Self, col: usize, row: usize) *T {
    return &self.storage[row * self.width + col];
}

what does arr[x, y] do then

how does an int array know where coordinates (x, y) should be stored

does it have a width and height?

[sonic wren]

then do this

[swift chasm]

C# has multi-dimensional arrays, T[,] - they can't use T[][] because that's a jagged array.
in Zig we don't have this problem since array types include their lengths.
arr[x][y] will work just fine in Zig

[sonic wren]

does every array in c# have this??? or is it a different type

that is somewhat surprising to me

[swift chasm]

those mean the same thing.
the C# version and the Zig version both calculate an offset into the sequence in the same manner

[tired hazel]

basically zig doesn't have syntax for multi dimension array and you have to create one for yourself 🤷‍♂️

[swift chasm]

that's since Zig has no need for those.
they exist in C# for the sole purpose of making sure each sub-array has the same length

(contrast with jagged arrays)

[lilac steppe]

If you allocate your arrays on the heap and plan on regrowing them it usually makes more sense to store the width and height and do arithmetic with those directly rather than allocating nested buffers. However, if your arrays are of a static size it makes sense to use nested arrays since, at compile time, Zig will produce essentially the same code as C#, so long as you don't need jagged arrays.

[swift chasm]

if your array's length is runtime known, you should probably go with @sonic wren's solution

[swift chasm]

this one